>> in what way does that dependence 'define us as human'?
>
>Read Rousseau, _discourse on inequality_. I dont
>think your vision of us all living likebull elephants
>in lordly isolation is very attractive.
Does Rousseau think mutual dependence "defines us as human"? (If so, then he also thinks slavery and misery define us as human). And doesn't he have a very soft spot for people who live like bull elephants in lordly isolation?
>From the Discourse:
(1) "Without needlessly drawing these details, everyone must see that since ties of servitude are formed solely by men's mutual dependence and the reciprocal needs that unite them, it is impossible to subjugate a man without first having placed him in the position of being unable to do without another; a situation which, since it does not obtain in the state of Nature, leaves everyone in it free of the yoke, and renders vain the Law of the stronger".
(2) "In a word, so long as they applied themselves only to tasks a single individual could perform, and to arts that did not require the collaboration of several hands, they lived free, healthy, good and happy as far as they could by their Nature be, and continued to enjoy the gentleness of independent dealings with one another; but the moment one man needed the help of another; as soon as it was found to be useful for one to have provisions for two, equality disappearedm property appeared, work became necessary, and the vast forests changed into smiling Fields that had to be watered with the sweat of men, and where slavery and misery were soon seen to sprout and grow together with the harvest".
Chris voiceoftheturtle.org